Skip to main content

About this Show

MONEY With Melissa Francis

News/Business. Melissa Francis with a breakdown of the day's top stories and their impact on the American Taxpayer.




San Francisco, CA, USA

Comcast Cable

Channel v761






Us 13, Dimon 4, Scott 3, The Irs 3, Oregon 3, Melissa Francis 2, Jamie Dimon 2, Jason 2, Seth Myers 2, Dennis 2, Irs 2, London 2, Melissa 2, Seth Meyers 1, Ahmadinejad 1, Walters 1, Leno 1, Unished 1, You Bet 1, Bet 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  FOX Business    MONEY With Melissa Francis    News/Business. Melissa Francis with a breakdown of the  
   day's top stories and their impact on the American Taxpayer.  

    May 14, 2013
    12:00 - 1:01am EDT  

in something hume like this, it does not help the economy or markets, get ready forr time because of the breaking news for facebook, but more tomorrow, stay tune. melissa: i'm melissa francis, and here is who is made money today. investors, a top competitor to bloomberg lp with bloomberg stuck in the spying scandal, compton rolls out the welcome mat saying they never engaged in similar activities, thompson stock up more than 1% since the news broke friday. also making money, netflix and cofounder ceo, climbed more tha 5%, closing short of a 52-week high, a little more than 1348 -- 1 million shares of netflix, nice job, well done. losing money today, justin eber, struck the concert in
africa, broke into a song room in the performance, and reportedly made off with $33,000 in cash. poor beebs. even when they say it's not, it's always about "money." ♪ all right, the top story tonight, no, y you are not paranoid. they may watch you after all. bloomberg news under fire for spying on banks, traders, and government officials like ben bernanke and tim geithner, not smart, using the bloomberg terminals used byvery bank and trader on wall street. now things are going from bad to worse. "the financial times" reports more than 10,000 private messages sent by terminal users have been leaked online. this doesn't bode we for companies to get 85% of the revenue from the terminals. with me now is jason weisberg
and scott, both traers and bloomberg terminal users, and a former fec attorney. us. as we reflect on this use out from the ft that all the messages are online, i want to remi you by the statement frrom the editor in chie at bloombg, a statement that just hangs you down the line saying, "at no time did reporters hav access to trading, portfolio, monitor, blotters, or other related systems, nor access to client's mesages to one another. they coun't see the stories clients were reading or the securiti that clients may be looking at." jason, that statement des not jive with what we see online. this is gone from bad to worse. >> if these alleged stories are proved to be true, they are extremely damaging because a lot of sensitive information travels across the bloomberg proprior
tear messaging system between my institutional clients and me and my trading staff. melissa: feel differently toda do anything differently? send fewer messages? >> used the phone more. i still use the terminal for the data, you know, we live in a data driven environment both socially and, you know, professionally and financially, and quite frngly, a little leery, always been leery, you think, you know, fire wall's in place prevent this, but this, in fact, took ace, it really is going to spell doomsday for the terminal users. melissa: scott, there's supposed to be a fire wall, and it seems like in so many cases, the fire wall is breached. did you feel differeny about the terminal or do anything differently? >> we felt differently here, we were app gri, you know, put so many things in plae, not letting me sign on, went away on
vacation, somebody else these my fingerprints. it's so difficult to use your terminal here, an pay, by the way, $2,000 a month for it, n some cases more, but at the same time, they let willie nilly happen. that makes us angry. the other republican we're angry is we're frustrated without a viable alternative. you have to haveall the customers on it. we're just stuck. angry. we are looking for a response to ensure this doesn't happen again. melissa: terry is a, at that point does it become illegal or criminal or where they have a liability? >> well, it depends. the fcc and fed and department of justtce, and the hard thing is we don't know all the information actually yet that people were actually able tot im the financial times report that if they were able to get information for inider trading, for example -- melissa: right, i was going to say, do they have to have
trade-in information they got by looking at what someone else was doing? i mean, that's the real scare here is that, you know, blooerg reporter can look in, see the activity done, and i mean, even if you take the london wale trade to look at what was going on and had a spouse, say, a friend, someone else on the other side of the trade. i'm not alleging that's what wht happened, but that's the fear, does it go that far to be criminal or anything else? >> well, there are other liabilities, civil liabilities too. it's a huge issue for public trust and market stability here so it goes far more than e criminal charges which, of course, are significant, but this could've taken us to the point of with the obama scare on twitter where, you know, you don't know the extent of this, and bloomberg has a lot to go if it's ever going to get the public trust back. i mean, they are significant, independent investigations that have to go forward. i mean, surely, we - we have
seen the statements they said so far are just not true. melissa: yeah, -- >> there needs to be a lot more disclosure. melissa: the adamant satement, and people chip at the facts of it. jason, you know, i was near times square, so many financial institutions here, tanding behind four people in line just came from a meeting inside their office talking about the pros and cons of keeping the bloomberg terminals talking about it. well, you know, i don't feel safe, i don't want to do the back and forth, and i asked where they were from, and they ran off. it was a natural, organic conversation going on blocks from the building. it has to be a conversation everyone is having. >> certainly, the majority of people are having this conversation. there might not be mall las here. could be exemployees or rogue. i'm not defending the actions, but i don't want to persecute the company because it might be a rogue thing, and they are finding out about it could be an exemployee. i want to think that's the case. trust is a big issue.
if we can't regain the trust, we're going to have to go down to a closed network. melissa: scott, talking to other people today, you know, saying this is their experience this is standard operating procedure dealing with bloomberg, very open about the fact they let the reporters look at who is logged in, who isnot logged in, and have faced questions, like, is this person still working for you or ben disciplined and have not logged in? that thing, if it was standing operating procedure, it's got to run deep; right? doesn't that really make ou nervous? >> well, i -- it does in a way. they are going to say they want to know wheth or not the terminal's used, do we have to switch over to another user, this is going to be a quote-on-quote sales technique, maybe, with harvesting of that information, but the very thing guys like at the bloomberg terminal is the instant messaging function a lot, a lot of orders and very, vercepstive
informatn is sent over that message. the reason why we love it is why we're killed with it. everything's recorded. they record everything for you so that if you have a dispute with the customer or somebody else in the market, go back three or four days ago, however long, and it's there for you. the very thing you like it is the very thing that's actually stabbing you in the back, and that's really led to a ton of frustration. melissa: yeah, no, especially, and if they have terminals, as we learned, at the fed, at the treasury insidehe white house and becomes much, much more serious what they do with that information. no doubt this is just the beginning of this story. thanks to all of you for joining us. appreciate it. >> all righty. >> thank you. melissa: next, is jamie dimon teleaphing the leaving? shld investors take the threat seously? plus, if you were aranoid about the irs before, oh, you probably are today. was it targeting conservative groups to get more revenue?
can you imagine. we'll explain that with more "money" coming pup -- coming up. ♪
melissa: no matter what time it is, money is always on the money
of miewch. shares of take two interactive climbing after hours. reported a strong quarter profit after l bell led by sales of the best selling by yo shock infinity video games that i play every night. things not letting up for jpmoan and jamie dimon who may leave all together if shareholders vote to split the powerful roles. two nk directors started fighting on his half to get investors to vote against a split in the meeting nex week. what's really in the best interest of shareholders? >> joining me now the cato institute, managing director with credit swiss. welcome back to the show, both of you. let me start with you. institutional shareholders, you know, this is the only thing they do is get out there and make a lot of noise around meetings, getting more press than ever before. do you think they are really sure -- are they serving the best interest of shareholders right now? >> well, they are shareholders
too, but sometimes they vote in ways, you know, they believe they got responsibilities and outsource themo firms that advise shareholders. my personal view is it's not in the best interest of the shareholders to make jamie dimon leave. whether it will or not iss an open question. melissa: mark, what dooyou think? >> i agree on that. two levels, first, there's a bunch of studies looking at how separating the boy and chair from the ceo affects stock performance, and the literature's mixed. i think the active should push the separations, don't really have a lot of science on their sidemy opinion, but i think specifically about this corporation, i have a hard time seeing how this is going to be a better thing for shareholders if you try to have too leaders in the organization, i think dimon hit bumps in the road, by by and large did a good job compared to other bankers, and i think this is going to hurt shareholders, despite there's a significant number of them to be split.
melissa: if you look empirically, the stock price is up25% since he's been in charge. >> oh, yeah. melissa: you know, he was the ceo who came through the financial crisis the least schaved of anyone. is all that outweighed by what happened at the london wale, what do you think? >> i certainy don't think so, and i think, you know, the act they were able to return 15% on tangiblequity in that year, even as they absorb the loss brings that out. i think the open question is, you know, if the regulators pushing pushing if something, maybe the best thing is to give them a little bit, though. that's the only reason to think about splitting up of the roles, not because hareholders vote for it per se, but because the regulators, rightly or wrongly, asked for it. meliss how do you weigh that as a sareholder. it doesn't make sense to give up half the role. if regulators lay off, i mean, i don't know. >> i think they -- let's give --
the vote was actually fairly large last year with 40%, so i don't think it's going t get it myself, but could be close. melissa: you don't? >> i don't, but it could be close. i don't think it's getting 50 plus, so put a margin of error around that, but if they get close to 50, you know, this is really going to put pressure on the board to do something. it's a nonbehinding resolution, the board ignores it, and it'sa question of confidence in dimon, and if i had a vote over 50%, that's not a good sinal from shareholders, particularly, if it much above 50%. melissa: how do you look at who to believe in the fight? everybody's lining up on either side. you look at on jamie's side, there's raymond from the board of directors, could be charming of the board if jamie went away, but at the same time, he's the one saing, you know, he's most effective for the structure, could be disruptive for the
company, and not in shareholders' best interest to split the role and not have dimon be chairman and ceo. they are on the board in the pocket, or they, in some ways, stand to enefit if tey were chairman themselves, have more power. i don't know, how do yo weigh it? >> it's clear the board is backing jayny jamie on this, and whether shareholders do or not is unclear. i imagine the board doesn't listen to them even if there's a 51% vote. >> when you have a revolt, and that's going to getgly. >> i think they can ignore 51. it's closing to 50 and above and hard to ignore, but the board ignores 51. i agree with that. this is why dimon is preemptively saying if it happens, i'll leave because it no longer becomes a choice of,
well, do i keep dimon and just have an indendent chairman? he's making this the choice of you t all of me r none of me, and i think if that's the choice that shareholders get, they say, well, i might not be comfortable with the situation, but better than without him. melissa: reat point. he doesn't need the job, but does it because he wants it. if it's miserable. interesting. thanks so much for coming on. appreciate theime. >> thanks. melissa: coming up, reports of the irs targeting certain groups get more damming by the minute. was it a plot to rake i more revenue? that's what i wonder. the power panel weighs in next. plus, 16 governors could save millions of taxpayer dollars on health care costs. why are they saying no to an offer from one of the biggest online health insurers? this ceo of e-health is here to explain. do you have too much "money"?
no way. ♪
♪ >> this is pretty straightforward. if, in fact, irs personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have. report -- that have been reported on and intentionally targeting conservative groups, than that's outrageous, and there's no place for it. melissa: huh, did you hear the "if"? president obama expressing jut rage over the irs fee yays key, yeah, i don't know. the administration wonders why people don't trust the government or wall street anymore. you have the irs fixing on certain organizations. you got bloomberg spying on traders through a terminal, and
brand new reports of the justice department spretly accesses phone records of the associated press. that's new. what's cominup next? joining me now is app grew, partners at edwards wildman jeffrey from harvard university, sorry,o comment there, and itch edson covering the story. rich, let me start with you, there's a hearing friday on irs thing. one of the big questions is who gave this order? where did it come from? how high does it goes; right? that's got to be the first thing to track down. >> yeah, absolutely. look at how it started on friday, the irs said that basicallthis was concentrated in cincinnati showing i was lower level employees who made the decision, a handful of them, and it went from there. look ag over the weekend, the trash ri inspector generaa's office did a report on this, and the director of the office that decides who is tax exempt and who is not, that person got a briefing at some point in june
of 2011 so they ere aware of that at that point a few years ago, and so how far up the chain that goes is something we are still waiting to see. we'll get the full irs report from the treasury inspector general in the next couple days, and then there's the hearing with basicay the guy who leads the office doing that report and the head of the irs friday. melissa: jeff, the question, of course, is why they targeted who they targeted, but, also, you know, the targeting eems to be a result o collecting more money to feed the spending machine. the step up in investigations, the treasury department says is going to yield between a billion and a billion-five extra in ta collections per ewe. is a lot of this about money? >> well, it might be about the money, but it's also probably about influence. if you take the mostextreme negative interpretation, if you try to make it hard for certain types oforganizations with particular political views to organize themselves as these types of 501c4 courses, they
don't do it in the first place shutting down use or policies not letting the organizations exist if they have particular characteristics. i don't think it's gout -- it's just about the money, but political. melissa: not just the money, but it's a reason to do it. andrew, we looked into the group, the tax exempt data mentioned, the 501c4. up like other charitable group they are allowedded to participate in political activities, but their primary activity must be social welfare in exchange for that, the tax free status. that sounds subjective to me. i mean, how do you determine their primary activity is social welfare? who defines social welfare? >> well, melissa, social welfare is generally defined under the tax law and certain regulations by the treasury department. it, in many ways, you're right, it is subjective; however, the
real test is whether or not an organization overall is promoting some sort of public good, is here somhing that's being -- that's being worked on to benefit society? does it have to benefit everyone in society, but it generally benefits society opposed to being specifically organized solely to nefit one particular individual or a small group of individuals. melissa: so any political group could, i mean, because that is the core of the question here is they are targeted under the idea maybe they don't qualify for the service because they are not a social welfare group but a political group. tea party groups and, for example, a liberal group, do they deserve tax free status? >> well, i don't know if you could say who deserves or does not. melissa: someone is, the irs makes the decision. that's the essential part of the question. >> absolutely, it's the irs's
job to review applications for taxes of status and apply the law to the fact that are presented. the law states that ech organization must be organized in a particular way and follow certain basic rules, it's not supposed to be a #kwe of what view -- what views are promoted one way or another. melissa: demanding to look at the records and have it come out for more than a year, felt vindicated, today, i think, on fox business earlier today, and is this snowballing? i mean, how would you characterize this story now? >> abslutely, and when y look at where this started a couple years ago, the ways and means committee was operating off some comments they had got from conservative organizations say, look, we're trying to get a tax exempt status from the irs, but we get follow-up questions and additional scrutiny, and, finally, the treasury inspector general report comes out, and now you've got the white house demanding some type of accountability here, you got a number of democrats, you got the
chairman of the senate finance committee, max aucus cals for the investigation, and more investigations in the house, and the administration waiting to see what happens in the report here so democrats and republicans call for investigations. right now, they are all on the same page. let's see if there's any type of connection that people might make in an investigation which there there is not now to someone in the administration. things change at that point. not saying we're going to get there, but we're at the early stages of this where democrats and republicans are both ope to invest -- investigating this. melissa: thank youappreciate it. here's the money question of the day, should any group participating in political activities given tax exempt status? i would love it. i don't have it. we want to hear from you. like us on facebook at is --
there's a plan that would save millions in tax dollars so why are governors saying, no thanks? the ceo of e-health joins us. plus, should drivers be taxed based on how many miles they rack up? oregon tests a pilot program that could come to your own dash board. i got a hint for you, more spying there for you. piles of "money" coming up. ♪ we went out and asked people a simple question: how old is the oldest person you've known? we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that sn't changed much is the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoyll of these years. ♪
>> for the average american out there, 85% of the americans who already have health insurance, this thing already happened, and their only impact is their insurance is stronger, better, more secure than it was before. full stop, that's it. you know, they don't have to worry about anything else. melissa: well, that's what the president said, but it does look like you're going to have to worry about shelling out more money after all, shocking. health care centers will now get 150 million to help the uninsured sign up for coverage under the health care law. this is on top of the 4 million going to states to hire new health insurance navigators. the next guest has a quicker and easier way to do i called e-health. the company's ceo is here. gary, welcome to the show.
>> thank you. melissa: the company is 14 years old, it's something you have already been doing, taking individuals who go through the site like amazon, pick the health insurance, and seems like it could work well for the government, but governors are not interested in doing this. how come? >> well, think of it as the of health insurance, and urnt the affordable care act, it's a choice unless they are eligible for sbsidy like lower income people, and there's a confusion in the legislation that they only use a gvernment exchange toget health insurance. we had a regulation release that said a state could decide e-health could be an option as well which makes a lot of sense. melissa: have you reached out to the governors say ihave a service, it's free, and they said, no, we want navigators instead? >> i talked to governors about it, and it makes sense, but when you get down to the bureaucracy and staff side of this where there's ideologies and people feel like it's the next facebook or google of the health insurance of business from the
federal government stand point. it's murky. my pint is all along, put exchanges place from a government standpoint, that's all fine, but here's a private sector entity who wants to work with the public sector to get people coverage, especially low income coverage at no costs. why wouldn't we do that? melissa: it's free because you get revenue from insurance companiethat sign up opposed to from the people that would be insure themselves. run through the criticisms to knock down. >> sure. kneel -- melissa: not everybody can afford a computer. >> they will have the same issue with government exchanges. people come to us, churches, community centers, schools, library, on and on, and, in fact, one of the important things that needs to happen here is we have to get young people covered because they are healthier and don't utilize to counterblansz peoplwho are frot as healthy. young people use mobile devic. 0% -- 20% of people have hand held
devices. melissa: what's obvious why they don't like the solution is @%cause they want what they call job creation, and it's, like, a new bureaucracy, a bunch more employees, and you see what a job the irs is doing spying on us, there's a group of people managing health care, but they call that job creation, the navigators, and you eliminate the need for them. aren't you against jobs? >> well, i don't view it that way. i'm for getting people coverage for those who don't have it, especially children and families. in fact, one of the thing i remind employees is all the time there's another family are children access to quality health care that didn't have it the day beore because of what we do. i'' focus the on getting people enrolled, not the government side job of this. melissa: conflict of interest because you're paid by insurance companies? >> no conflict, same product at the same prices. no cost to the consumer to enroll through us. melissa: yeah. >> there's cost to the state or federal government to enroll
through a gusted exchange because it does cost money to operate these things. melissa: easier to deal with a hub, a navigator, or opposed to going online and trying to sort this site? is a prson better? >> it may be for some people, and i don't have objection to navigators, the point is let's have choices for lower income people. remember, people who are not subsidy eligible can use e-health or a government exchange. shouldn't low income people have the same choices as welteddiest people? that they wanta navigator, use it, let them have the choice as well because wealthier people have the choices. melissa: you have been doing this thing for a while. >> it works, but we don't know how well government exchanges work, but e-health works. melissa: thanks, appreciate the time. >> thank you. melia: fuel emissions are not just the only thing electric cars use, and states make less money from gas taxes, not enouh funds to bild and repair roads.
oregon is trying to pave the way with the pay per mile program. a lot of drivers gave it the green light. the senate senator star created the task frt for the pilot program joining me now on the phone. i want to ask you exactly how this works because there's a lot of choices. you can have a flat rate plan, you can be tracking your car, which makes me nervousing wireless reporting with vecle location, what are the options? how does it work? give me more details. >> caller: it's a relatively simple program. we provide drivers options. we did a pilot with 150 people that they could choose a basic plan that ad no gps in the plan. they could choose a smart phone plan wheee folks could down load an app. there's another map with gps so they can only be charged with miles driven insid our state.
melissa: senator, is it cheaper if you allow yourself to be tracked? >> so i -- the answer is yes because you're only charged for miles you drive inside the state. if folks don't want that, though, they have the choice, and that's the beauty of the system. we provide drivers choices, and the other beauty of the system is we partner with the private sector so we're not creating a government bureaucracy. i'm not interested in creating a human government bureaucracc to ppy for. utilize tchnology that exists today through the private sector to manage the problem. melissa: whatyore interestedded in, up front about it, trying to collect more revee, and i wonder, you tax the things you want to disdirge. the reason why people are paying less gas tax is because they are using less gas. you are going to punish them for doing the very thing that everyone has been encouraging, be fuel efficient, buy the electric car, they are unished. does tat make sense? >> i'm interested in funding o
transportation system. i'm not interested in raising more taxes. our program is revenue neutral. you -- the reality is that it's not only oregon, but every state in the union and the fedel government is challenged with this situation where the federal government mandating through higher cafe standards, hi mileage vehicles. melissa: is can't be true or you wouldn't be doing it. >> caller: it's absolutely true. melissa: you are afraid to lose revenue down the road because of the standards because cars are more and more efficient so there's less revenue; right? >>aller: you cn't get something for nothing. we have to pay for the road systems, and the fuel tax has been over time a very first time way for the users of the highways to pay for them so all -- melissa: discouraging ommerce, people dring are, they are going to work, going shoppg, doing all the things we need them to do to fuel theeconomy. if you penalize them for driving around in the long run, you hurt the economy. how do you respond?
>> not anymore than people who pay for the stem using the fuel tax today, people that drive today pay a fuel tax. i say that in the future, we're going to accomplish the same tax throh a road user charge opposed to a fuel tax. the fuel tax worked well when everybody got the same fuel mile aiming, but today when they drive a car that gets 15 miles a gallop, why should they pay more than the car getting 50miles a gallop or an electric vehicle that's not paying anything. melissa: ty paid a premium for the call. >> caller: not paying a dime for the road use or to help to fund the maintenance and construction of roads. melissa: yeah. >> caller: that's not fair. melissa: you are getting support for this because it went through, and people voted for it so it's interesting to see how it works out. thanks so much for coming on. we appreciate the time. >> caller: you bet. melissa: all right. a new face getting into the late night talk show, seth myers is jimmy fallon's successor, huge
paydays, but will they prove the winning duo? don't go away. at t end of the day, it's all about "money". ♪
♪ melissa: seth myers takes over late night when jimmy steps into leno's role next year. myers could be laughing all the way to the bank. the show is called "money," and some say he makes $6 million to $9 million a year. that's good. is it a money move to be the next late night legend? leer with more is dennis. i like the nit gi gritty money part. how much does hemake in the new gig? >> reports are like six and nine million a year. i can't imagine making near that much on "saturday night live," and the bigger winner is lauren
michaels, executive producer, executive producer the late night, and now adds the tonight show coming in because follon goes to the night show, winning control of that, but holds on to late night with seth, a true naturalone of the few cast members who say his own name in that news report every week, hi, i'm seth meyers and is better known than the other guys who proceeded him. remember, is is quite a perch; right? david letterman in that seat, o'brian, fallon, and no meyes. as a comic, you don't turn it down. mel million i don't imagine you do. he's going to fewer viewers, 1.7 million. >> once a week. melissa: huge number. >> especially that late at night, and even the tonight show gets far more than fallon. he gets 1.7 million in late night, and tonight show got, like, 3.5 million. the later you go into the
evening and more we turn off the sets to go to sleep, the smaller the add menace. messa: it is five days a week and more money potentially. >> it is. melissa: a gd move? >> so the ad revenue on the show is lower than the tonight show which is 140 million business, letterman on cbs comes clse to the figure. this is a good deal smaller than that. we'll see he manages to bring viewers into it. the same profile, young people like fallon, like seth, but i wonder format-wise, is he ready to be the personable, ad lib host against a well scripted, well rehearsed news reader who reads written jokes. he was the head writer of saturday night live, good at it, but i wonr if the talk show host format requires another set of muscles. melissa: interesting. at the white house dinner, he was his hysteric, but it was prepared and scripted, a little off the cuff -- >> with an audience that
appreciates him, but sucking up to celebrities saying tell us about your film. see how he does at that. he'll be a challenge. melissa: interesting. i had not thought about that. the real money winner here who is lorn michaels. you're controlling three shows probably bringing in, i'm just going to have to guess, $300 million for the network. imagine a ceo bringingin 300 million a year in revenue. if i were at this point, i would argue i'm under paid, but he owns a piece of the shows with the production company. melissa: yeah, no, absolutely. >> paying himforever. saturday night live is on the cable dial, the reruns, 20-year-old reruns still on the kale dial. melissa: with the goal of being plucked out to do something better. he's been on for 12 years, seth, must feel it's time to move op. >> i can't believe it's been that lng, took that long for the jump. look at the spinoffs, and the cast members, goodness, quite --
i can't think of another franchise in television that's done that. melissa: dennis, thank you. i love when you break it down, the money news. thanks so much. up next, ahmadinejad appears in public with the guy you see on your screen, and now the iranian president faces 74 lashings, lashings baa -- because of his. why only 74? we'll explain that. you can never have too many lashes. ♪
♪ melissa: wait until you see how appropriate the song is. it is time for fun with spare change joined by the fab pair, and thanks to both of you for joining us, and buckle up now. first up, look at this. it is sir richard branson dressed up, woah, as a flight attendant. good legs, i have to say. he lost a bet. you know, he's probably loving every minute of it. he even shaved the legs or wax the, maybe, we don't know, but the money from the flight went to a foundation for hospitalized children. looks like he's long it, and he looks decent. good legs; right?
>>the only -- melissa: you look horrified. >> yeah. melissa: recoiling all the comments. >> nice, but from the waist up, not so much. i'll tell you thi the only person who looks better in drag is tony. a little known fact. >> and she's the only one who's seen me that way and will stay like that. melissa: wow. this is taking quite the turn that i did not anticipate. >> whatever value the legs have, the face is brutal. we like to say the brutal face because he looks like david beauy and other miste from a cosmetic surgery table. melissa: looks to be enjoying it. >> too much. melissa: shaved/waxed the legs, but why not the face? >> do you have to shave your legs with panty hose; right? am i the only one thinking out loud? melissa: thought that immediately. >> do u want th hair poking through? that's worse. melissa: okay. this is horrible. moving on really quick.
barr raymond is etiring in 20 # 14 and whether or not you love barbara walters, give her props, the first cohost on the today show in 1976, negotiating a llion doar salary in 76. at the age of 70, co-created "the view," still co-executive produces, and appears on even after retiring. i wonder if she is retiring, tony, because she's raking in the money. >> absolutely. she's someone people go to and pele respect her tremendously, the first in many things as a pioneer. here's why i don't think we're never going to have another walters because we have melissa francis and so many other -- melissa: love the sucking up, so great. >> so many other wonderful people in the news business who i think get the opportunity that many in her day were not tting. there's, obviously, a lot of chance for people to move up the ranks. melissa: she made so much money, though, co-creating and owns the
show rather than being a hum l newscaster. i love the organization i work for, yet, i do not own money with melissa frap sis. >> she's a trail blazer, and. in the busiss for 50 years, i mean, who does anything for 50 years? that's incredible. melissa: it is. all right. do you believe in karma? this might interest you. the iranian president ahmadinejad faces 74 lashes or six months in jail in iran. evidently, he accompanied an election candidate to the pole, which is against the law because it is seen as endorsement. do you think he'll face one of the punishments? most importantly, do we get to vote on which one he gets? m going for the lashes. >> yeah, that would be exciting. i hear dennis rodman is on the way to iran to negotiate. [laughter] a much more benevolent punishment for the president, but he's not running again. he was going with the buddy on what was called literally in the article, his day off. i don't think they have days off.
what's up with that? melissa: i don't know. a day of if you're ahmadinejad? >> apparently, you do. you do whatever you want, but what's interesting, e rodman reference, if he had the lashes in drag. if e -- i think that would be most apropos. >> like the drag theme. melissa: moving on quick, another horrifying image with that. ever wonder what the biggest productivity killers are at work? coworkers stopping by the desk, half the day they e-mail or message coworker even if they sit next to them. what's your biggest killer? facebook? >> twitter. melissa: twitter. that's productive. you tweet to get viewers. that's part of the job. >> i think that is part of my job. >> you to. >> stop it. none of the social the list. how convenient. >> because it works. melissa: faceok is a killer.
i don't know. i'm tweeting. that'sproductive am listening to what you are saying and responding. a paid advertisement for starvista entertainment and time life's music collection. these are songs about real life... songs about love... songs that come straight from the heart. ♪ here you come again ♪ ♪ just when i've begun to get myseltogether ♪ ♪ oh, baby, i'm gonna love you forever ♪ ♪ ♪ forever and ever, amen ♪ mama, he's azy ♪ crazy over me ♪ just the good ol' boys ♪ never meaning no harm